Am I the only one concerned about how this kind of know how (not so sophisticated nowdays but nevertheless) is reaching the hands of nutcases?

Military bases are usually well protected. Ordinary cities (either western or eastern) are not. Imagine such an attack against a crowd anywhere.

I believe that this attack should make most governments around the world pause and think about what it is going on in Syria.

Except when it’s ISIS fighters getting help and hospital treatment. Turkey has been on the attack against Kurds both sides of the border anyway, both directly and indirectly through Islamist insurgents. I think it’s fair to say they deserved trouble because they helped create it.

My comments simply reflected the fact that various undesirables are passing over that border on the ground on a regular basis, as if it didn’t exist. To date Turkey has only made an effort to stop one aircraft. Now they’ve lost an aircraft, so maybe it went across the border slightly, or maybe the Igla guys decided it was close enough to shoot down anyway, who knows?

The thing is that there is an armed conflict, that sometimes borders civil war, inside Turkey and it is mostly ignored by everyone. If the AH-1 was downed inside Turkey, then it was by PKK, while if it was inside Syria, the YPG did it. With your reply, you simply equate PKK with YPG which it is the official Turkish position on the subject. So the next time Erdogan accuses Kurds in Syria as terrorists, you will agree with him?

Where it was downed really matters.

I think that the thread title is a bit misleading. If that video (youtube seems to have take it down but I believe it is the same one that is all around the net ) shows PKK and a Turkish AH-1 Cobra, then we are talking about the Turkish offensive in Turkey, not Syria.

Why Russian aircraft are flying without Flags, Red Stars or not even serial numbers on them?

My guess it that they erased them for the ferry operation to Syria. It was done before the official Russian involvement and was considered more or less secret. They probably wanted to keep some denyability till they start operations. Now that there is an official campaign they are putting them back on.

@Mercurius,

As your (a)typical westerner, I simply don’t buy it, at least not yet. I try to be as unbiased as I can and always look for some truth at both sides of a story. I read most of the western media but I read RT, even blogs like the Saker as well. What I’ve seen till now is disappointing. No I will not accept what US says in face value. They blew that card when they lied about Iraq’s WMD. For me, US will say whatever suits its interests at any given time, truth or lie. Most of the time, I hide like most Europeans behind the fact that US interests are the same as EU interests. Not this time. We have a US vs Russia confrontation, where whatever both sides do, the big loser is Europe. Not the EU, but European countries.

So, I wait to see evidence from both sides. Russian Defence Ministry presented a case, weak or not, and asked a few questions. US side seems to live in a dreamworld. “I’ve got some secret evidence and take my word for it”. No I will not. I want them to debunk every single question the Russians set and present their case. If they don’t, they will only make me wear my tin foil cap and blame them instead.

It’s not absolutely necessary that it was an Su-25. This is a radar image after all and not visual. The Su-25 has no radar, so identification based on radar type is not possible. As you say, chaff and ECM can do all sorts of things to an old SARH missile or maybe they thought it was an An-26 with an escort. Either way, it is the Ukrainian’s fault for a) Letting civilian aircraft over that area, and b) flying military aircraft on war sorties in the vicinity.

In doing so it turned a civilian airliner into an effective contribution to a military effort by using it as a decoy.

http://ihlresearch.org/amw/HPCR%20Manual.pdf

Section J, I, 63(f)

Section E, I, 22(d)

Section G, 41 – Did anyone inform the rebels, which aircraft were civilian?

Section H, 42 – Ukrainian military jet shouldn’t have been next to airliner

Section H, 43-46 – Ukrainian military should have diverted air traffic.

Section I, IV, 54 – Airliner shouldn’t have been there.

Section I, IV, 55 – Was a NOTAM issued to rebel forces?

OK, i get it now. Thank you for that information.

@Amiga500,

That is what I’m talking about. Forget sides, good and bad guys, labels. It is simply commercial flight safety. People in the Ukrainian defence ministry probably knew that BUK systems were on rebel hands and no one informed air traffic control? There is something wrong with the system. You have the Ukrainian government daily accuse Russian air defence of taking down it’s planes and the Eurocontrol simply ignored them? There is something wrong with the system. I don’t know and I don’t care who tells the truth in this case. All I know, is that sending civilian aircraft over that zone is an accident waiting to happen. You reroute planes simply for the suspicion of a storm forming. Is it hard to regulate the same kind of rules about war zones? Or it costs too much money?

Yes you are are right of course. I just prefer the hijack scenario because I hope that the plane landed and all those people are still alive. I only raised the more fuel theory because I’m thinking Africa as a destination. The path there is relatively radar free and the east coast is filled with messed up places where you can land an aircraft and hide it. Is it possible for that plane to reach there without refueling?